Economic losses from smoking far outweigh any economic benefit from the tobacco industry

The Lancet Public Health ^ | 9/28/22

[Drango]

New findings by the American Cancer Society (ACS) found cumulative economic losses from cigarette smoking topped $891 billion in 2020, or 4.3% of the United States Gross Domestic Product. The economic loss significantly outpaced the cigarette industry's $92 billion revenue by nearly a ten-to-one ratio. The study was published today in the journal The Lancet Public Health.

This economic modeling study is one of the first to provide a comprehensive measure of economic loss from cigarette smoking on a state-by-state level. On average, states lost $1,100.00 per capita income annually from cigarette smoking. Kentucky ($1,674.00), West Virginia ($1,605.00) and Arkansas ($1,603.00) suffered the largest per capita income losses, while Utah ($331.00), Idaho ($680.00) and Arizona ($701.00) had the smallest per capita income losses. ~snip

[Reno89519]

And you say that while also claiming to likely be a loyal American conservative, yet you are doing illegal business with communist Cuba. Nice, good to get that out into the open.

[cgbg]

I have zero virtue.

I smoke cigars stolen from their rightful owners in Cuba on land stolen from its rightful Native American owners.

Folks who claim they have virtue are the scariest people on the planet.

[fretzer]

And we’re supposed to trust the Lancet now?

[100%FEDUP]

"Economic loses for the diseases of the homo lifestyle?"

XiBiden said last week we'll be spending over $6 billion!

[whitney69]

“The total figure cited is $892 billion, not $55,000.”

From the article:

“This economic modeling study is one of the first to provide a comprehensive measure of economic loss from cigarette smoking on a state-by-state level. On average, STATES LOST $1100 PER CAPITA ANNUALLY from cigarette smoking.”

The figures you are seeing by their admittance in the article, is not displayed as per person, but per state at their $1100 mark average. And 50 states at that average per state is $55K. If the article is written wrong, then so be it. But that’s what it says.

wy69

[HartleyMBaldwin]

Per capita MEANS per person.

[BiteYourSelf]

Good point.🤔

[BiteYourSelf]

The gooberment is already taxing tobacco in excess of 50%.🤔

[EVO X]

I quit smoking over 20 years ago which was a good decision for me. That said, I haven’t seen a single article about smoking causing bad outcomes in people that get covid-19.

[adorno]

The gooberment is already taxing tobacco in excess of 50%

That money should not be in government's hands. It should be in a health-care fund, and managed by insurance and/or health-care professionals.

[whitney69]

“Per capita MEANS per person.”

And you buy it? I worked around these people for 15 years for the Department of the Army and the DOD and they only tell you what they want you to hear in a way that you can use your own guess at what they actually said. They never once indicated a single person but they did mention individual states.

“On average, STATES LOST $1100 PER CAPITA ANNUALLY from cigarette smoking.”

Did they say individual persons per capita within the states or individual states per capita. This is called talk around. Read exactly what they said not what you think you see. They said states lost the money not the individuals in the states. The people in the states were never mentioned throughout the entire article. Only states so they are the subset being used.

wy69

[BiteYourSelf]

True, but the gooberment can’t stand to see any money outside of it’s control.🙄

[HartleyMBaldwin]

Oh, FFS. Do you ever think even a tiny bit about what you’re writing? $1,100 per state over the course of a year is a very, very small part of any state’s economy, merely a fraction of a cent per person. There would be no way to sort out a variation that small, nor would it be newsworthy.

Once again, the article says “per capita”. The phrase means “per person”, literally “per head”. That means individual people, not entire states. Look it up if you don’t believe me.

In your own words: Read exactly what they said not what you think you see.

[Arm_Bears]

Gee, it’s a darn shame The Lancet pissed away its credibility years ago.

[Go_Raiders]

ROFLMAO! You’re cute, thinking that any societal program mandated by the Uniparty will rely on anything other than expanding Government debt.

Write your Congress person, I’m sure they/them (lol) will get right on your idea!

Be sure to keep us posted on the bipartisan support it builds!

[adorno]

... thinking that any societal program mandated by the Uniparty

Tell you what... just forget all about politics and all about political parties, and all about you or anybody mattering at all when it comes to elections and decision-making.

Just go along and leave everything to everyone else, and perhaps then, you'll end up deserving everything that comes your way.

If nothing matters, then, just go hide under a rock and hope and pray for the best, until somebody decides to lift that rock from over you.

LOSER!

[Go_Raiders]

Try posting something based on reality.

Or as soon as you run into reality, feel free to lash out and name call.

Free country, for the moment, so your call...

[adorno]

Try posting something based on reality.

Ooh, poor baby.

Don't like being called out? Then, try to be relevant and your nonsense wasn't relevant. Try to be relevant yourself, and perhaps you'll discover something relevant to post about.

There are choices that people can make, but when you choose to make foolish statements, like 'it doesn't matter what side you're on, and you won't make a difference' (just to paraphrase where you're coming from), then, YOU are completely irrelevant and YOU don't count.